representation and electoral systems - American Political Science ...

REPRESENTATION AND ELECTORAL
SYSTEMS
Section on Representation and Electoral Systems
© The American Political Science Association
Rockefeller College
State University of New York at Albany
135 Western Avenue
Albany, New York 12222
Vol. XXIII, No. 2 Editor: Joseph F. Zimmerman (zimmer@albany.edu) April 2008
SECTION WEB SITE
Webmaster Erik Herron of the University of Kansas reports the Section’s Website
is functioning and can be accessed at http://www.apsanet.org/~res/ The site contains
back issues of Representation and Electoral Systems with the exception of the current
issue which is available only to Section members, and links to related sites in other
nations.
SECTION PANELS
Program Chair Matthew Golder of the Florida State University has announced the
Section-sponsored panels at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science
Association in Boston, August 28-31, 2008.
Panel 1: Co-sponsored with Comparative Democratization
Panel Title: “Changing Perspectives on Party System Institutionalization in New Democracies
Panel Chair
Richard Gunther (Ohio State)
Panel Discussant
Dr. Herbert Kitschelt (Duke)
Panel Participants
Michael Bernhard (Penn State) and Ekrem Karakoc (Penn State), “Moving West or
Going South? Inequality and Institutionalization in Post-Communist Party Systems.”
Scott Mainwaring (Notre Dame) and Carlos Gervasoni (Notre Dame), “Extra System
Electoral Volatility and Party System Institutionalization.”
Steven I. Wilkinson (Chicago), “How Colonial Legacies of Party Competition Affect
Post-independence Levels of Democracy.”
Margit Tavits (Wash. U.), “Party Organizations and Electoral Performance in Central and
Eastern Europe.”

Panel 2: Co-sponsored with Elections and Voting Behavior
Panel Title: New Issues in Voter Turnout: Americanists meet Comparativists
Panel Chair
Harold D. Clarke (UT Dallas)
Panel Discussants
Dr. Brad T. Gomez (FSU)
Miki Caul Kittilson (Arizona State)
2
Panel Participants
Jan E. Leighley (Arizona) and Jonathan Nagler (NYU), “Issues, Voter Turnout and Class
Bias in the U.S., 1972-2004.”
Jack Vowles (Exeter), “Turnout, Competitiveness, Age, and Generations in British
Elections, 1964-2005.”
Eric C.C. Chang (Michigan State) and Tse-Hsin Chen (Michigan State)
“Uncovering the Micro-foundation of Turnout and Electoral Systems.”
Jean-Francois Godbout (Simon Fraser) and Mathieu Turgeon (UNT), “A Matter of
Degree: Policy Preferences and the Probability to Vote.”
Aina Gallego (Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona), “Why is Turnout More Unequal in
Some Countries Than in Others? The Impact of Institutions and Political Mobilization.”
Panel 3: Co-sponsored with Comparative Democratization
Panel Title: Dictators, Citizens, and Elections
Panel Chair
Ellen M. Lust-Okar (Yale)
Panel Discussants
Susan Dayton Hyde (Yale)
Jennifer Gandhi (Emory)
Panel Participants
Andrew Barwig (Denver), “Electoral Rules and Electoral Participation in Arab
Parliamentary Elections.”
Henry A. Kim (Arizona), Nathan Batto (University of the Pacific), and Faten Ghosn
(Arizona), “Wringing More Seats out of Votes: the Case of Jordan”
Sarah Birch (Essex), “Electoral System Manipulation in Non- and Semi-Democracies”
Philip Roessler (Oxford) and Marc Howard (Georgetown), “Risking Defeat: Explaining
Electoral Contestation in Authoritarian Regimes.”
Graeme Robertson (UNC) and Grigore Pop-Eleches (Princeton), “Elections, Revolution
And Democracy in the Post-Cold War Era.”

Panel 4: Co-sponsored with Comparative Politics of Advanced Industrialized Societies
Panel Title: Representation in Parliamentary Systems.
Panel Chair Matt Golder (FSU)
Panel Discussants
Royce A Carroll (Rice)
Michael D. McDonald (Binghamton)
3
Panel Participants
Professor G. Bingham Powell Jr. (Rochester), “Party System Change and Ideological
Congruence.”
Jay K. Dow (Missouri). “Party Dispersion in Majoritarian and Proportional Electoral
Systems.”
Paul V. Warwick (Simon Fraser), “Bilateralism or the Median Mandate? An Examination
of Rival Perspectives on Democratic Governance.”
Lawrence Ezrow (Essex), “Party Responsiveness to Men and Women in Western Europe:
Do Parties Respond Equally to the Policy Preferences of Men and Women?”
Panel 5: Co-sponsored with Women and Politics
Panel Title: Electoral Institutions and Female Representation
Panel Chair Janet K. Boles (Marquette)
Panel Discussants
Rob Salmond (Michigan)
Karen Beckwith (Case Western)
Panel Participants
Dr. Melody Ellis Valdini (Portland State) and Lisa Baldez (Dartmouth),
“Existence is not Enough: A Comparative Study of Gender Quota Implementation.”
Andrew Roberts (Northwestern), “The Effect of Electoral Rules on Women’s
Representation: Surprising Results.”
Burt L. Monroe (Penn State) and Elena Kirtcheva (Penn State), “He Said, She Said:
Feminine Pronouns and the Parliamentary Representation of Female Points of View.”
Christina Xydias (Ohio State), “(Gender) Quota Vadit?: Electoral Institutions and
Concepts of Representation in Germany.”
Robert G. Moser (UT Austin) and Stephanie Holmsten (UT Austin), “Do Ethnic Parties
Discriminate Against Women?”
Panel 6:
Panel Title: Politics of Electoral Reform
Panel Chair
David M. Farrell (Manchester)
Panel Discussants
Richard S. Katz (Johns Hopkins)
Kenneth R. Benoit (Trinity College)

4
Panel Participants
Jih-wen Lin (Academia Sinica), “The Endogenous Change of the Electoral System: The
Case of SNTV.”
Shaheen Mozaffar (Bridgewater State), “Context, Contingency and Choice in Electoral
System Reform.”
Alan J. Renwick (Oxford), “The Politics of Electoral Reform in Established
Democracies.”
Georg Lutz (Lausanne), “Explaining the introduction of PR: non-strategic actors, unfair electoral
competition and the need for political coordination.”
Panel 7: Co-sponsored with Elections and Voting Behavior
Panel Title: ID Requirements and Voter Turnout
Panel Chair
Richard Sobel (Harvard)
Panel Discussants
Jonathan Nagler (NYU)
Richard Sobel (Harvard)
Panel Participants
Matt A. Barreto (University of Washington), Stepehn Nuno (UC Irvine), and Gabriel
Sanchez (University of New Mexico), “The Disproportionate Impact of Photo Identification
Requirements on the Indiana Electorate.”
Jonathan N. Katz (Caltech), “The Effect of Voter Identification Laws on Turnout.”
David Anderson (Rutgers), “A Peek Inside: How Provisional Ballots Can Cast Light
Upon Voter ID and Turnout.”
Stephen D. Ansolabehere (MIT), “The Voting Experience in the 2008 Presidential
Primary Elections.”
Marjorie R. Hershey (Indiana, Bloomington), “Costs of Voting: Effects on Turnout.”
Panel 8: Co-sponsored with Comparative Politics of Advanced Industrialized Societies
Panel Title: Voter Turnout: Who Votes and Why?
Panel Chair
Melanie Goodrich (NYU)
Panel Discussants
Robert A. Jackson (FSU)
Timothy Hellwig (Houston)
Panel Participants
Todd Donovan (Western Washington University) and Caroline Tolbert (Iowa), “The
Political Context of Learning: Electoral Competition and Turnout of Less Interested Citizens.”
Marina Costa Lobo (Universidade de Lisboa) and Michael Lewis-Beck (Iowa), “Party
Identification vs. Ideology in Portugal: Evidence from the 2005 Legislative and the 2006
Presidential Elections.”

5
Lee Ann Banaszak (Penn State) and Ekrem Karakoc (Penn State), “Revisiting Bonding
and Bridging Associations in Ethnically Diverse Societies: Their Differential Effect on Political
Participation.”
Jae-Jae Spoon (Iowa) and Christian Jensen (Iowa), “Moving Beyond Turnout: The
Effects of Compulsory Voting on Governments and Policy Outcomes.”
Vincent A. Mahler (Loyola University, Chicago) and Sarah Skowronski, “Exploring the
Sources of Cross-National Variation in Electoral Turnout: An Empirical Analysis of the
Developed Countries.”
Panel 9:
Panel Title: Re-Examining Strategic Voting
Panel Chair
Bernard N. Grofman (UC Irvine)
Panel Discussants
Pradeep Chhibber (Berkeley)
R. Kenneth Carty (UBC)
Panel Participants
Bernard Dolez (CERAPS), Annie Laurent (CERAPS), and Eric Dubois (CERAPS).
Michael F. Meffert (Mannheim) and Thomas Gschwend (Mannheim), “Strategic
Coalition Voting. Evidence from Austria.”
Jungug Choi (Konkuk University), “The Extent and Determinants of Strategic Voting:
The 2004 Indian General Elections.”
Jiyoon Kim (Montreal), “Decision Under Two Ballots: Strategic Voting Behaviour of
Korean Electorates.”
Panel 10:
Panel Title: Electoral Coordination and Volatility
Panel Chair
Kenneth W. Kollman (Michigan)
Panel Discussants
Indridi Haukur Indridason (Oxford/UC Riverside)
Won-Ho Park (Florida)
Panel Participants
Heather Stoll (UCSB) and Allen Hicken (Michigan), “Legislative Policy-Making
Authority and Electoral Coordination in Parliamentary Democracies.”
Eitan Tzelgov (Penn State), “Party System Inflation in Proportional Representation
Democracies.”
Frank C. Thames (Texas Tech), Dennis Patterson (Texas Tech) and Joe Robbins (Texas
Tech), “The Institutional Causes of Electoral Volatility.”
Jon Fraenkel (Australian National University), “Neo-Patrimonialism, Unbounded Politics
or Personal Rule? An Investigation of Parliamentary Instability & Incumbent Turnover in postindependence
Melanesia.”

Panel 11: Co-sponsored with Women and Politics
Panel Title: Gender Quotas and Women’s Political Representation
Panel Chair
Richard E. Matland (Loyola University, Chicago)
Panel Discussants
Leslie A. Schwindt-Bayer (University of Missouri, Columbia)
Richard E. Matland (Loyola University, Chicago)
6
Panel Participants
Petra Meier (Antwerp), “Do Gender Quotas Have an Impact? Explaining the Increasing
Number of Women in Belgian Politics.”
Gretchen M. Bauer (Delaware), “Better Governors? The Impact of Women MPs on
Governance in Africa.”
Jennifer Marie Piscopo (UCSD), “The Framing and Articulation of Women’s Rights in
Argentina: Evidence from Legislative Debates.”
Aparna Thomas (Cornell College), “Formal and Informal Institutions: Gender and
Participation in the Panchayati Raj.”
Susan Franceschet (Calgary) and Mona Krook (Wash. U.), “Measuring the Impact of
Quotas on Women’s Substantive Representation: Towards a Conceptual Framework.”
Panel 12: Co-sponsored with the law and Political process Study Group
Panel Title: Debating Rules for Presidential Elections: Primaries and the Electoral College
Panel Chair
Mark Rush, Washington and Lee University
Panel Participants
Vikram, Amar, Hastings College of Law
Bruce Cain, University of California, Berkeley
Daniel Lowenstein, University of California, Los Angeles
Steven Smith, Washington University
Posters
Josh Ryan (University of Colorado, Boulder), “The Relationship Between State
Redistricting Methods and House Member Ideology.”
Shigeo Hirano (Columbia University), “Direct and Indirect Representation.”
Frank C. Thames (Texas Tech University) and Margaret Susan Williams (Goucher
College), “Political Context and Party Gender Quotas in the OECD.”
Paulina Pospieszna (University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa), “Government Responsiveness
in Central and Eastern Europe:Relating Median Voter and Government Policy Preferences.”
Ko Maeda (University of North Texas), “The Behavioral Differences between Ruling
Parties and Opposition Parties: Policy Shifts, Leadership Changes, and Splits.”
Ray Christensen (Brigham Young University), “Democratic Reversals, A Study of
Electoral Outcomes that Differ from the Intent of the Voters.”
Michael J. Ensley (Indiana University) and Edward G. Carmines (Indiana University,
Bloomington), “The Long-term Consequences of Competitive House Campaigns.”

SECTION TREASURER REPORT
7
Professor Bonnie M. Meguid of the University of Rochester assumed the role of
Section Treasurer/Secretary as of September 2007. Because the account information was
not available at the time of the annual business meeting held during the 2007 annual
meeting of the American Political Science Association, she submits a “mid-year”
Treasurer’s Report on the state of the section’s finances as of January 31, 2008.
American Political Science Association
Representation and Electoral Systems Organized Section
Treasurer's Report (July 2007 - January 2008)
1. Beginning Balance $5,701.63 [6/30/07]
2. Income Since July 2007
3. Expenses Since July 2007
Quarterly Section Member Dues $248.00 [8/02/2007]
Quarterly Section Member Dues $138.00 [10/17/2007]
Mailing Label Sales $67.82 [8/02/2007]
TOTAL INCOME $453.82
2007 Award Plaques $541.26
New Checks for the Account $30.00
TOTAL EXPENSES $571.26
4. Balance as of 31 January 2008 $5,584.19
Respectfully Submitted,
Bonnie M. Meguid
Section Treasurer

8
She notes “our income derives mainly from section membership dues. According
to APSA’s count in January, our current membership is 379. We need to maintain a
membership of at least 250 per quarter in order to retain APSA’s Organized Section
status, which includes the right to be part of the official Program Committee of the
Annual Meeting. This report also shows that our expenditures have exceeded our
income, but by only a small amount; this has been the pattern over the last 18 months.
SECTION BYLAWS
I. NAME AND PURPOSE OF SECTION
The name of this section is the Section on Representation and Electoral Systems of the
American Political Science Association. The purposes of this section are to promote
teaching and research in the areas of representation and electoral systems, and to
encourage communication among persons interested in these fields within the
Association and with related disciplines.
II. MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. Membership in the Section is open to all persons with an interest in
Representation and Electoral Systems who pay the annual section dues and their associate
or regular American Political Science Association dues.
Section 2. Annual section dues may be established at the annual meeting of
the section and are payable at the time of payment of associate or regular American
Political Science Association dues.
Section 3. The annual meeting of the section will be held in conjunction with
the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. The announcement of
the section’s annual meeting will be published in the printed annual meeting program of
the Association.
III. GOVERNANCE
Section 1. An executive committee consisting of eight members shall be
elected at the annual meeting of the section in odd number years for two year terms.
Section 2. One of the members of the Executive Committee shall be elected
at the annual meeting of the section in odd number years to serve as chairperson. The
chairperson of the section shall preside at the annual meeting, call meetings of the
executive committee, and be responsible for implementing and coordinating the programs
of the section for a two-year period.
The chairperson shall appoint three members to serve as a Nominations Committee
under the chairmanship of a member designated by the chair-person of the section. The
Nominations Committee shall recommend at least one member for each office the terms
of which are due to expire at the next annual business meeting.
The chairperson shall appoint a Secretary-Treasurer who is responsible for submitting
an annual report to the chairperson of the section and to the Executive Director of the
American Political Science Association. The chairperson shall appoint other officers

9
from among members of the Executive Committee as the chairperson may consider
appropriate.
IV. PROGRAMS OF THE SECTION
The Section may establish special panels, workshops, symposia, and social gathers at
the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, and at international,
regional, state, and other professional meetings.
V. AMENDMENT OF THE BYLAWS
The annual meeting of the Section shall have the power to amend by Bylaws of the
Section by a majority vote.
ELECTIONS, PUBLIC OPINION, PARTIES CONFERENCE
The 2008 annual Elections, Public Opinion, and Parties Conference will be held at
the University of Manchester (England) on September 12-14, 2008. High quality papers
on any aspect of these subjects will be welcomed and there are no methodological biases
or prejudices.
Panel proposers should complete the Panel Proposal Form (see below) and
submit it as an E-mail attachment to conference convenor David Cutts at
David.Cutts@manchester.ac.uk. All panels should have a minimum of three papers and a
maximum of four papers. All panel proposals forms must be completed in full, including
an abstract of each paper.
Individuals submitting a paper proposal should submit an abstract of no more than
150 words as an E-mail attachment to David.Cutts@manchester.ac.uk.
The deadline for proposals is May 2, 2008. Conference details are available at
http://www.epop08.com
ELECTION LAW COURT DECISIONS
Editor: Richard Winger
Ballot Access News
E-mail: richardwinger@yahoo.com
During the period October 2007 through March 2008, political parties continued
to win lawsuits involving their own autonomy when they nominate candidates. There
were also significant court developments in voter identification requirements for voting at
the polls, and in equal treatment for minor parties relative to campaign assistance from
state governments.
However, the single most important development in election law in that period
may not have been any particular court decision, but the enactment by the Vermont
General Assembly of Senate bill 108 providing for the use Instant Runoff Voting for
congressional elections. As of the date of this article, we do not know whether Governor
James Douglas will sign or veto that bill. No state to date has used Instant Runoff Voting
for statewide general elections.

10
Political Party Autonomy Cases
On January 16, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a unanimous opinion in
New York State Board of Elections v Lopez Torres upholding New York State procedures
for choosing party nominees for Justices of the Supreme Court (a general trial court).
New York is divided into 12 Supreme Court districts. Each district elects its own
Supreme Court Justices on a partisan basis. The Lopez Torres lawsuit concerned the
election law governing how political parties nominate candidates for these offices. The
lower courts had invalidated the law, but the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated them, and
seemed to say that since the Democratic and Republican parties approve of those state
laws, and since political parties have a freedom of association right to control their own
nominations process, therefore they are constitutional.
The case would have been more interesting if a New York state political party that
does not approve of the state nomination procedures had filed a lawsuit. The Court’s
decision is only 12 pages long and seems to add nothing new to judicial theory on
political party autonomy. One of the oddities of the decision is that although it says the
major political parties support the state nominations procedures, the lead plaintiffs are
Democratic Party members and residents of Brooklyn. Neither the New York State
Democratic Party, nor the Brooklyn Democratic Party, nor the national Democratic Party
intervened in the case or expressed any opinion to any of the courts that heard this case.
The only arm of the Democratic Party that expressed any opinion whatsoever was the
Manhattan Democratic Party. However, the U.S. Supreme Court took no note of this
anomaly. The most quoted line from the Lopez Torres decision will probably be this one:
“A political party has a First Amendment right to limit its membership as it wishes, and
to choose a candidate-selection process that will in its view produce the nominee who
best represents its political platform.”
The specific procedures upheld in the case require parties to nominate by
convention, and to elect delegates to these judicial nominating conventions. The law
provides that delegates are nominated from the 150 Assembly districts which vary in
population. The lead plaintiff, Margarita Lopez Torres, lives in the Brooklyn judicial
district which has 21 Assembly districts inside itself. So, if Lopez Torres wanted to place
a full slate of delegate candidates who were pledged to her candidacy, she would need to
recruit 305 candidates, and have them placed on Democratic primary ballots. A slate of
delegates within an Assembly district needs 500 signatures. Hence, she would have
needed to coordinate 21 different petition drives, each requiring 500 valid signatures of
Democrats who had not signed a petition for a competing slate. The U.S. Supreme Court
did not discuss the record, which showed that in practice, organizing such slates and
getting them on the ballot is so difficult that not one insurgent candidate for Judge has
ever been able to do the job, in the 80 years this system has existed. The only group that
can get the job done is the party organization, so generally, only delegates chosen by the
county party leaders get on the primary ballot, and therefore the primary voters have no
choice in which judicial candidates are nominated. The U.S. Supreme Court did not refer
to this matter. The court merely opined that since an individual candidate for Delegate
only needs 500 signatures, obviously there is no ballot access constitutional problem.

11
Other Political Party Autonomy Decisions
The Democratic Parties of Michigan, Florida, Texas, and Nevada, all won
lawsuits filed by voters or candidates who were unhappy with party decisions about the
presidential nominating process. The Texas lawsuit was filed by presidential candidate
Dennis Kucinich, a member of Congress. He challenged a Texas Democratic Party rule
providing no one can be placed on the presidential primary ballot unless that candidate
signs a pledge promising to “fully support” the eventual presidential nominee of the
party. The U.S. District Court upheld the party rule and suggested that it is not important
since it is not legally binding. Kucinich asked for injunctive relief from the 5 th circuit,
but failed to get it and he did not appear on the Texas ballot in March. He also asked for
injunctive relief from the U.S. Supreme Court, but he did not get that either. His lawsuit
remains alive and he is asking the 5 th circuit to rule that the party’s Bylaw is illegitimate.
The case is called Kucinich v Texas Democratic Party.
The Nevada Democratic Party won a lawsuit filed by a voter who challenged the
party’s decision to establish presidential caucus meeting places in large hotel-casinos.
Nevada state law governs presidential caucus procedures and does not provide for
meeting places that are not based on a voter’s residence. The party set up the special
caucuses to accommodate workers who were required to work during the evening hours
when the caucuses were held. A federal court ruled that freedom of association provision
of the First Amendment protects the party’s decision. This case was called Chesnut v
Democratic Party of Nevada.
The Florida Democratic Party and the national Democratic Party won a lawsuit
filed by U.S. Senator Bill Nelson, and another lawsuit filed by an ordinary voter. Both
lawsuits challenged the party’s decision not to seat Florida delegates at the national
convention. The Nelson lawsuit was filed in the Northern District, and when Senator
Nelson lost the case, he did not appeal. The other lawsuit, DiMaio v Democratic
National Committee and Florida Democratic Party, lost in the Middle District of Florida.
On March 21, 2008, the 11 th circuit affirmed the lower court decision which was based on
standing. However, the 11 th circuit said the voter is free to file a new case which should
cure his standing problem.
Political parties lost an election law decision in the U.S. Supreme Court on March
18, 2008. That case, Washington State v Washington State Republican Party, had been
filed in U.S. District Court in 2005. The lawsuit had been filed by the Republican,
Democratic, and Libertarian Parties, to challenge the “top-two” primary initiative passed
by the voters of Washington state in November 2004. Because the U.S. District Court
had ruled the “top-two” system unconstitutional in 2005, and because the 9 th circuit had
agreed in 2006, the “top-two” system has never been tried in Washington. The U.S.
Supreme Court said that the system does not, on its face, violate the associational rights
of political parties. It noted that the system may yet be shown to violate those rights, but
until it is tried, courts won’t have enough evidence to decide the case.
That system provides that all candidates run on the same primary ballot in August (for all
federal and state office except president). Then, only the two candidates who poll the
most votes, and the second-most votes, may appear on the November ballot.
The “top-two” law provides that candidates may express their party preference on
ballots, but that no one should assume that this means that the political parties approve of
candidates who say they “prefer” that particular party. The U.S. Supreme Court said that

12
since the Washington election system does not involve nomination by political parties,
therefore the parties can not complain that they have lost the right to control their own
nominations process. In effect, there is no longer a party nominations process in
Washington state (except for presidential electors and delegates to presidential
conventions). By contrast, the lower courts had ruled that since the system does place
party labels on ballots, therefore the system suggests that parties do nominate candidates,
and therefore party associational rights are still implicated. The Washington Republican
Party has already filed an amended complaint against the “top-two” system, to transform
its original lawsuit into an “as applied” lawsuit, so it is clear that litigation over the
Washington system will continue for some time.
Other Areas of Election Law Litigation
On January 9, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case
involving whether states may require voters at the polls to show government photo
identification in order to vote at the polls. No decision has been released in Crawford v
Marion County Election Board. For the most part, state legislatures are not enacting new
laws on this subject, and new lawsuits are not being filed on this subject while the nation
awaits the decision.
The only ballot access decision of note during the October 2007-March 2008
period was from the 6 th circuit which, Citizens for Tax Reform v Deters, struck down an
Ohio law that made it illegal for initiative proponents to pay circulators on a per-signature
basis.The court noted that initiative proponents had presented credible evidence that the
law would cost them an additional $300,000. The evidence showed that petitioners who
are paid per signature are more productive than petitioners who are paid by the hour.
Minor parties won four lawsuits against discriminatory state laws that relate to
campaign assistance from governments, during the last six months. In New Hampshire
and Michigan, minor parties won rulings striking down laws providing the government
should give a free list of the voters to the major parties, but not other parties. In New
Hampshire, the case was in state court and is called Libertarian Party of New Hampshire
v Gardner. In Michigan, the case was in federal court and is called Green Party of
Michigan v Land.
In Connecticut, a U.S. District Court issued a 49-page ruling on March 20, 2008,
suggesting that the Connecticut public funding law, enacted in 2005, is apt to be held
unconstitutional. The case is Green Party of Connecticut v Garfield. The Court denied
the state’s motion for summary judgment, and said a trial will be held to establish if the
law is constitutional. The law provides that all candidates for state office who want
public funding must raise small contributions from many contributors. The amount of
contributors is the same for all candidates. However, if the candidate is not a member of
a party that polled 20 percent for Governor at the last election, and if the candidate wants
the full amount of public funding, he or she must submit a petition signed by 20 percent
of the last vote cast for that office.
Connecticut argued that it is constitutional to make public funding more difficult
for people who are not Democrats and Republicans because the U.S. Supreme Court in
1976 had upheld a federal law that gives general election public funding to political
parties’ presidential campaign committees if that party polled 5 percent in the last
presidential election. New parties and independent candidates who were not eligible for

13
the funding before the election could receive such funding after the election if they polled
5%. But the Connecticut court said that the U.S. Supreme Court decision from 1976,
Buckley v Valeo, does not settle the issue. The Connecticut court pointed out that
presidential general elections in the U.S. are almost always very competitive. However,
most Connecticut state legislative races are not competitive; in most districts, the seat is
“safe” for one of the two major parties. Yet the Connecticut public funding system
makes public funding readily available to the weaker of the two major parties, in these
uncompetitive districts.
Finally, on the subject of candidate eligibility to run for Congress, a Minnesota
state court in Rice County ruled on January 18, 2008, in Richards v Windschitl that a
convict serving time in prison may run for Congress. This decision is consistent with the
1995 U.S. Supreme Court decision in U.S. Term Limits v Thornton which held that states
may not add to the constitutional qualifications for people to run for Congress. Even
though individuals may not be able to vote, if they are old enough, and citizens, and
residents of the state they wish to represent, they may not be barred from running if they
show a modicum of support.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
The Commission on August 31, 2007 published notice of proposed rulemaking in
the Federal Register seeking public comment on proposed changes to the Commission
regulations pertaining to electioneering communications. The notice was a response to
the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 25, 2007 decision in Federal Election Commission v.
Wisconsin Right to Life, Incorporated (127 S.Ct. 2652, 168 L.Ed.2d 309) relating to
Wisconsin right to Life, Incorporated use of its own general treasury funds, which
included corporation contributions, to pay for broadcast advertisements that referred to
the two U.S. Senators from Wisconsin, one of whom was identified as a candidate for
federal office in the election. The court opined that because the advertisements were not
the “functional equivalent of express advocacy,” the prohibition on corporate or labor
organization funding of electioneering communications was unconstitutional as applied
to the plaintiff’s advertisements. The court added a communication is the “functional
equivalent of express advocacy” only if it “is susceptible of no reasonable interpretation
other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate.
The text of the proposed rules is available in the Federal Register (72 FR 50261)
and is posted on the Commissions web site at http://fec.gov/law/law_rulemakings.shtml
The Commission on December 14, 2007, approved modifications of the rules governing
the funding of electioneering communications by corporations and labor organization and
to apply the reporting and disclaimer requirements to electioneering communications
made by corporations and labor organizations. A new section (11 CFR 114.15) provides a
general exemption from the prohibition on corporate and labor organization funding of
electioneering communications unless the communication is susceptible of no reasonable
interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a clearly identified federal
candidate.
The full text of the final rule and explanation and justification is available in the
Federal Register (72 FR 72899) and also is posted on the Commission’s web site
http.//www.fec.gov/law/law_rulemaking.shtml#ec07.

14
Congress enacted and president George w. Bush signed on September 14, 2007,
the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (PL. 110-81, 121 Stat. 735, 2
U.S.C.§1601) amending House and Senate Ethics Rules and the Federal election
Campaign Act. Amendments to the latter act introduces new disclosure requirements for
certain committees that receive bundled contributions from lobbyists and committees
established or controlled by any lobbyist and new rules relating to travel on private jet
aircraft. The law requires candidates’ authorized committees, leadership political action
committees, and party committees to disclose the name, address, employer of, and the
bundled contribution amount credited to, each lobbyist (or lobbyist’s committee) who
provided the committee with bundled contributions aggregating in excess of $15,000
during specified time periods.
The commission on December 20, 2007, certified $19,287,504.65 in federal
matching funds to seven presidential candidates (Joseph Biden, Christopher Dodd, John
Edwards, Duncan Hunter, Dennis Kucinich, John McCain, and Thomas Tancredo) for the
2008 election. Other candidates declined to participate in the matching fund program.
The presidential public funding program, however, lacks sufficient funds to make the
payments.
On December 20, 2007, the commission amended its written rules for the conduct
of meetings to provide for circumstances when the commission has fewer than four
members. Currently, the commission has only two members. The amended rules were
published in the Federal Register on January 30, 2008 (73 FR 5569) and are available on
the commission’s web site:
http://www.fec.gov/law/cfr/ej_compilation/2008/notice_2008-01.pdf
The commission reported a 1.5 percent increase in the number of federally registered
political action committees (PACs) from 4,168 to 4,234 during the second half of 2007.
Corporate PACs continue to be the largest category with 1,601 committees, an increase
of 15. Labor PACs remained constant at 273, but trade/member/health PACs declined by
1 to 925.
The commission issued several advisory opinions.
Advisory Opinion 2007-9 provides the Kerry-Edwards 2004 General Legal and
Compliance Fund may reimburse the Kerry-Edwards 2004 Incorporated Presidential
Campaign Committee for the portion of its advertising expenses dedicated to compliance
with the “stand-by-your-ad” provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.
Advisory Opinion 2007-10 holds a candidate’s committee may not recognize the
corporate employers of individual contributors at a golf tournament fundraiser because
the use of the corporation’s name, trademark, or service mark would result in the
corporation facilitation of contributions which are prohibited by the Federal Election
Campaign Act.
Advisory Opinion 2007-16 holds the American Kennel Club (AKC) and its
voting clubs and accredited clubs are membership organizations under the Federal
Election Campaign Act and commission regulations, and the voting clubs and the
accredited clubs are affiliated with AKC. Therefore, any separate segregated fund the
AKC establishes may solicit contributions from the individual members of its affiliated
voting clubs and accredited clubs.
Advisory Opinion 2007-18 authorizes U.S. Representative Charles Rangel’s
principal campaign committee or his leadership political action committee to pay for the

15
commissioning of an official portrait of the representatives that will be donated to the
U.S. House of representatives.
Advisory Opinion 2007-19 stipulates a non-profit 501(c)(4) corporation qualifies
as a membership organization and individuals selected to be members of that
organization qualify as “members” for purposes of the Federal Election Campaign Act.
Hence, the organization may solicit those individuals for contributions to a separate
segregated fund established by the organization.
Advisory Opinion 2007-22 provides Jim Hurysz for Congress may receive
volunteer services and professional services from Canadian citizens and may use its
campaign funds to pay for candidate travel to Canada in order to gather campaign-related
information. The committee may not accept elections materials donated by Canadian
campaigns, but may purchase the materials at fair market value. Mr. Hurysz also may
use his personal funds to pay for candidate travel to Canada and to obtain information
from Canadian citizens.
Advisory Opinion 2007-24 allows the campaign committees of Jim Burkee for
Congress (Republican) and Jeff Walz for Congress (Democrat) may engage jointly in
fundraising and campaigning activities provided the committees use an appropriate
payment method for each type of activity, and otherwise follow the limits, prohibitions,
and other requirements of the Federal election Campaign Act.
Advisory Opinion 2007-28 provides U.S. Representatives Kevin McCarthy and
Devin Nunes may, in addition to soliciting funds from federally permissible sources and
not exceeding the contribution limits for individuals and political committees, may solicit
funds from individuals, subject to a $20,000 calendar year limit, for one or more
independently run ballot measure committees in connection with the qualification and
passage of a redistricting initiative.
Advisory Opinion 2007-34 holds a federal candidate’s appearance on a billboard
endorsing a nonfederal candidate is not a coordinated communication and may be paid
for with nonfederal funds.
BOOK REVIEWS
Editor: Richard Vengroff
Kennesaw State University
Kennesaw, Georgia 30144
Telephone: (770) 423-6174
E-Mail: Richard_Vengroff@kennesaw.edu
Section members with forthcoming books should notify the book editor to facilitate the
speedy review of books.
Rein Taagepera, Predicting Party Sizes: The Logic of Simple Electoral Systems. Oxford
and New York: University of Oxford Press, 2007. xxii, 314 pp. ISBN: 078-0-19-
928774-1. Hardback, $84.00.
Predicting Party Sizes is a testament to Rein Taagepera’s seminal contribution to
cumulative theory development in comparative electoral systems research. It builds on

16
but goes well beyond Seats and Votes (Taagepera and Shugart 1989) because of
substantial advances since the publication of that classic in our understanding of the
relationship between electoral systems and party systems. The book represents the
culmination of almost four decades of painstaking research into unpacking, extending and
formalizing the Duvergerian macro-agenda with the goal of developing a parsimonious
model of electoral systems that can predict the number and size of political parties. That
research began with Taagepera’s 1969 MA thesis on “The Seat-Vote Equation” at the
University of Delaware, which he completed four years after earning a doctorate in
physics also at the University of Delaware. It is thus no coincidence that Taagepera’s
theory-building effort has embodied the rigorous analytical method of the hard sciences.
In Predicting Party Sizes, Taagepera draws on his basic research to also delve into the
realm of applied politics by offering practical advice to practitioners about the
institutional design of electoral systems they should adopt. This bold step is carefully
calibrated, however, to the predictions of the analytical models and the advice is thus
tempered with emphasis on what is feasible and not necessarily what is desirable, given
the political goals politicians wish to achieve. This incursion into applied scholarship
was motivated by the appreciation of the severe time constraints on practitioners’ ability
to consider all the possible consequences of institutional choice that Taagepera gained
through his own venture into politics, first as a presidential candidate in Estonia (“ending
a respectable third”) and then as the founding chair of a political party that, after his
tenure, won parliamentary seats before “crashing” (p. ix).
In contrast to the concern in much of the literature with the triviality that “institutions
matter” (as if there was any doubt!), Taagepera begins with a succinct exposition of
“How Electoral Systems Matter (Ch. 1) that appropriately emphasizes the remote effects
of electoral systems on the structure of party systems via their direct effect in restricting
seat distributions and subsequent effect on the vote distributions of political parties. But
Taagepera’s also draws attention to the exogenous conditions that limit the impact of
electoral systems: “An excellent institutional framework cannot compensate for flawed
political culture, but inadequate institutions can make it worse” (p. 5). Unwittingly,
Taagepera highlights an important but unacknowledged insight of institutionalism, that
the hallmark of good institutional analysis is an appreciation of both the limits of such
analysis and the bounds within which institutions shape political outcomes.
This modest approach helps to buttress Taagepera’s preference for the analytical rigor
and method of physics in developing the parsimonious predictive model of simple
electoral systems. To ensure that the substantive and technical complexity of the analysis
does not obscure its practical utility, Taagepera wisely begins each chapter with a block
of bulleted points “For the Practitioner of Politics,” which present in plain English the
key lessons of the chapter as guidelines for choosing electoral systems. The chapters are
themselves written in an engaging style with clear exposition of the mathematical
formulas, graphs and numerical data presented to clarify the theoretical arguments. The
more complex technical materials, such as proofs of equation, which should be of
interests to specialists, are appropriately consigned to an appendix to each chapter.

17
Part I of the book on “Rules and Tools” offers a useful review of the typology and key
institutional components of electoral systems. The discussion covers familiar ground –
the origins of electoral systems (Ch. 2), simple and complex electoral systems (Ch. 3), the
number and balance of political parties (Ch. 4), deviations from proportionality (Ch. 5),
and the degree of openness of electoral systems to small parties (Ch. 6) – and sets the
stage for Part II on the “Duvergerian Macro-Agenda: How Simple Electoral Systems
Affect Party Sizes and Politics.” This is the substantive core of the book in which
Taagepera draws on recent advances and his prodigious contribution in elaborating
Duverger’s central argument concerning the relationship between electoral systems and
party systems. Chapter 7 presents a concise exposition of the Duvergerian agenda for
simple electoral systems, “those that include no features beyond assembly size, a fairly
uniform magnitude for districts, and seat allocation according to a usual PR formula
(which boils down to FPTP when M = 1)” (p.110). This parsimonious model is
employed to predict the number of seat-winning parties and the largest seat share (Ch. 8),
the seat shares of all parties and the effective number of parties (Ch. 9), and the mean
duration of cabinets (Ch. 10). Shifting gears from prediction to application, Taagepera
presents an intriguing discussion of how to simplify complex electoral systems (Ch. 11),
in which he employs the notion of an “output-based effective magnitude” to calculate
which simple electoral system is likely to produce, on average, the observed value of
some output, for example, the effective number of parties, of an existing complex
electoral system. In Ch. 12, he employs the now classic cube root law of assembly size to
clarify the logic of designing an optimum-sized assembly. In Ch. 13, Taagepera extends
his initial exposition in his MA thesis of the “law of minority attrition” in FPTP systems
to PR systems. The law says that the under-representation of social minorities in lowerlevel
political positions (e.g. city councils) will, on average, be replicated in higher-level
positions (e.g. national legislatures). Ch. 14 presents a model for converting seats into
votes that may facilitate more analytically precise calculations of the effective number of
electoral parties, but this model is presented with only illustrative examples and will
require further testing with empirical data.
Part III on “Implications and Broader Agenda” begins with a discussion of the
relationship between thresholds of representation and the number of pertinent parties (Ch.
15). Because the inputs that determine the effective number of electoral parties include
institutional variables as well exogenous (structural) and the more contingent strategic
variables, the models in Chs. 14 and 15 do not have accurate predictive capability and
thus require further refinements. Ch. 16 extends the logic of simple electoral systems to
seat allocation in federal chambers and the assemblies of the European Union. Ch. 17
concludes with some realistic (read feasible) answers to the question “What Can We
Expect from Electoral Laws?”
The reliance on cumulative theory building and analytical rigor to develop a successful
predictive model of simple electoral system and the use of this model to clarify future
research directions for completing the Duvergerian agenda (e.g. Chs. 14 and 15) make
Predicting Party Sizes an important book. The use of this model as a guide for offering
practical advice on electoral systems choice also makes it an innovative book. The focus
on a simple electoral system model defined by only three variables, of course, ignores the

18
complexity of most electoral systems in practice, but the choice is analytically and
practically sound. Analytically, it facilitates the construction of a parsimonious
predictive model and helps to clarify the logic, dynamics and outcomes of electoral
systems, not a mean feat because this is invaluable information for constructing
predictive models of more complex electoral systems, such as, for example, mixed
parallel and compensatory systems as well as other institutional permutations.
Practically, it helps to identify for time-constrained practitioners the core institutional
components of electoral systems and clarify their consequences for party systems and
cabinet duration.
An innovative variable that underscores the predictive power of the simple electoral
systems model is vintage Taagepera. Inspired by Colomer’s “micro-mega” rule – “the
small prefer the large, and the large prefer the small,” (Colomer 2004: 3) – the seat
product of simple electoral systems (M F S) is obtained by multiplying the assembly size
(S) by the number of seats in the average district (or the mean district magnitude M), with
M modulated by the seat allocation “formula exponent” (F). The predictive power of the
seat product rests on the fact that it is a combined summary expression of the three
components of simple electoral systems, assembly size, district magnitude and electoral
formula. It represents the “comprehensive outcome of (Taagepera) trying to make sense
of electoral systems for over 40 years” (p. 92).
Simple electoral systems predict average outcomes. This may not be entirely satisfactory
if one is looking for predictive precision, but it is consistent with the requirements of
conceptual parsimony and analytical rigor that facilitate the development of predictive
models. Moreover, the predictions derived from the simple electoral system model
conform, on average, to observed global patterns. Taagepera’s deductive approach thus
holds up well against empirical evidence.
Seats and Votes is one the most widely cited books and has inspired many of the best
works in comparative electoral systems research. But its non-statistical approach has not
been widely emulated in the field. Predicting Party Sizes may very well suffer the same
paradoxical fate. There is no small irony in this. Within its narrowly defined focus on
simple electoral systems, it has achieved the scientific ideals of cumulative theory
building and prediction that motivated the behavioral revolution in political science over
fifty years ago. But this accomplishment has come at a time when the emphasis in
political science has shifted toward more context-sensitive theorizing. But even here,
Predicting Party Sizes contains important insights. The unfinished Duvergerian agenda
noted by Taagepera involves, among other things, clarifying the microfoundations of
simple electoral systems, which requires tackling the thorniest of contextual variables,
political culture and its relationship to the psychological effects of electoral systems and
the resulting strategic calculations of political actors. And if Taagepera’s disciplined
approach motivates and informs theory-building in this endeavor, then Predicting Party
Sizes could share another fate with Seats and Votes. In 1999, Seats and Votes won the
George H. Hallett award (Disclosure: I chaired the award committee). It should not a be surprise if
Predicting Party Sizes is a strong contender for the same award a decade from now

19
Colomer, Josep. 2004. “The Strategy and History of Electoral Systems Choice,” pp. 3-78. In
Josep Colomer (eds). Handbook of Electoral Systems Choice. New York: Palgrave.
Taagepera, Rein and Matthew S. Shugart (1989). Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of
Electoral Systems. New Have: Yale University Press.
Shaheen Mozaffar
Bridgewater State College
BIBLIOGRAPHY ON REPRESENTATION AND ELECTORAL SYSTEMS
September 1007-March 2008
Erik S. Herron
University of Kansas
E-Mail: eherron@ku.edu
Books (English Language)
E-Voting and Identity First FIDIS International Conference, Vote-ID 2007, Bochum, Germany, October 4-
5, 2007, Revised Selected Papers. 2008. New York: Springer.
Arao, Danilo A., Bobby M. Tuazon, Policy Study, Publication, and Advocacy, and Center for People
Empowerment in Governance. 2007. Oligarchic Politics: Elections and the Party-List System in the
Philippines. Diliman, Quezon City: CenPEG Books.
Arnautovi c, Suad. 2007. Ten Years of Democratic Chaos: Electoral Processes in Bosnia and Herzegovina
from 1996 to 2006. Sarajevo: Promocult.
Benham, Liza A. 2008. From Winning Elections to Influencing Policy: The Electoral-Policy Link for
Minority Voters. New York: LFB Scholarly Pub.
Bickerstaff, Steve. 2007. Lines in the Sand: Congressional Redistricting in Texas and the Downfall of Tom
DeLay. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Blais, André. 2008. To Keep or to Change First Past the Post? The Politics of Electoral Reform. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Blum, Edward. 2007. The Unintended Consequences of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Washington:
AEI Press.
Boussahba-Bravard, Myriam. 2007. Suffrage Outside Suffragism: Women's Vote in Britain, 1880-1914.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bowler, Shaun and Amihai Glazer. 2008. Direct Democracy's Impact on American Political Institutions.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Brady, David W. and Mathew D. McCubbins. 2007. Party, Process, and Political Change in Congress:
Further New Perspectives on the History of Congress. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Brinkerhoff, Derick W. 2007. Governance in Post-Conflict Societies: Rebuilding Fragile States. New
York: Routledge.
Brug, Wouter v. d., C. v. d. Eijk, and Mark N. Franklin. 2007. The Economy and the Vote: Economic
Conditions and Elections in Fifteen Countries. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brunell, Thomas L. 2008. Redistricting and Representation: Why Competitive Elections Are Bad for
America. New York: Routledge.
Buell, Emmett H. and Lee Sigelman. 2008. Attack Politics: Negativity in Presidential Campaigns since
1960. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
Carlson, Matthew. 2007. Money Politics in Japan: New Rules, Old Practices. Boulder: Lynne Rienner
Publishers.
Childs, Sarah. 2008. Women and British Party Politics: Descriptive, Substantive and Symbolic
Representation. New York: Routledge.

20
Cotta, Maurizio and Heinrich Best. 2007. Democratic Representation in Europe: Diversity, Change, and
Convergence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DeBardeleben, Joan. 2007. Democratic Dilemmas of Multilevel Governance: Legitimacy, Representation
and Accountability in the European Union. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Duch, Raymond M. and Randolph T. Stevenson. 2008. The Economic Vote: How Political and Economic
Institutions Condition Election Results. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Espino, Rodolfo, David L. Leal, and Kenneth J. Meier. 2007. Latino Politics: Identity, Mobilization, and
Representation. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.
Farrell, David M. and Roger Scully. 2007. Representing Europe's Citizens? Electoral Institutions and the
Failure of Parliamentary Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fowler, James H. and Oleg Smirnov. 2007. Mandates, Parties, and Voters: How Elections Shape the
Future. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Frenkel, Yehonatan S. o. and Stewart Firth. 2007. From Election to Coup in Fiji: The 2006 Campaign and
Its Aftermath. Canberra, A.C.T: Asia Pacific Press.
Gallagher, Michael and Michael Marsh. 2008. How Ireland Voted 2007: The Full Story of Ireland's
General Election. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Greene, Kenneth F. 2007. Why Dominant Parties Lose: Mexico's Democratization in Comparative
Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gunther, Richard, Hans-Jürgen Puhle, and José R. Montero. 2007. Democracy, Intermediation, and Voting
on Four Continents. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hainsworth, Paul. 2008. The Extreme Right in Western Europe. New York: Routledge.
Hazama, Yasushi. 2007. Electoral Volatility in Turkey. Chiba: Institute of Developing Economies.
He, Baogang. 2007. Rural Democracy in China. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Henderson, Ana. 2007. Voting Rights Act Reauthorization of 2006: Perspectives on Democracy,
Participation, and Power. Berkeley: Berkeley Public Policy Press.
Hillygus, D. S. and Todd G. Shields. 2008. The Persuadable Voter: Wedge Issues in Presidential
Campaigns. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jankowski, Nick. 2007. The Internet and National Elections: A Comparative Study of Web Campaigning.
New York: Routledge.
Levine, Stephen I. and Nigel S. Roberts. 2007. The Baubles of Office: The New Zealand General Election
of 2005. Wellington N.Z.: Victoria University Press.
Lijphart, Arend. 2007. Thinking About Democracy: Power Sharing and Majority Rule in Theory and
Practice. New York: Routledge.
Lockerbie, Brad. 2008. Do Voters Look to the Future? Economics and Elections. Albany: State University
of New York Press.
Lundberg, Thomas C. 2007. Proportional Representation and the Constituency Role in Britain. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Maravall, José M. and Ignacio Sanchez-Cuenca. 2008. Controlling Governments: Voters, Institutions, and
Accountability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCool, Daniel, Susan M. Olson, and Jennifer L. Robinson. 2007. Native Vote: American Indians, the
Voting Rights Act, and the Right to Vote. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mendis, Dushyantha. 2008. Electoral Processes and Governance in South Asia. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Pilon, Dennis. 2007. The Politics of Voting: Reforming Canada's Electoral System. Toronto: Emond
Montgomery Publications.
Poundstone, William. 2008. Gaming the Vote: Why Elections Aren't Fair (and What We Can Do About It).
New York: Hill and Wang.
Roy, Ramashray and Paul Wallace. 2007. India's 2004 Elections: Grass-Roots and National Perspectives.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Ryan, Louise and Margaret Ward. 2007. Irish Women and the Vote: Becoming Citizens. Dublin: Irish
Academic Press.
Schaffer, Frederic C. 2007. Elections for Sale: The Causes and Consequences of Vote Buying. Boulder:
Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Schaffer, Frederic C. 2008. The Hidden Costs of Clean Election Reform. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Segell, Glen. 2007. The UK General Election Results 2005. London: Glen Segell.
Shapiro, Ian, Peter Swenson, and Daniela Donno. 2008. Divide and Deal: The Politics of Distribution in

21
Democracies. New York: New York University Press.
Steinbrecher, Markus, Sandra Huber, and Hans Rattinger. 2007. Turnout in Germany: Citizen Participation
in State, Federal, and European Elections Since 1979. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Streb, Matthew J. 2008. Rethinking American Electoral Democracy. New York: Routledge.
Taagepera, Rein. 2007. Predicting Party Sizes the Logic of Simple Electoral Systems. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Torjesen, Stina and Indra Řverland. 2007. International Election Observers in Post-Soviet Azerbaijan:
Geopolitical Pawns or Agents of Change? Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verlag.
Tremblay, Manon. 2007. Women and Legislative Representation: Electoral Systems, Political Parties, and
Sex Quotas. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Vreese, C. H. d. 2007. The Dynamics of Referendum Campaigns: An International Perspective. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Wolbrecht, Christina, Karen Beckwith, and Lisa Baldez. 2008. Political Women and American Democracy.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zuckerman, Alan S., Josip Dasovic, and Jennifer Fitzgerald. 2007. Partisan Families the Social Logic of
Bounded Partisanship in Germany and Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Books (Non-English Language)
IUrydychna Vidpovidal Nist Za Porushennia Zakonodavstva Pro Vybory Narodnykh Deputativ Ukraïny.
2007. Kyiv: Parlaments'ke vydavnytstvo.
Parlamentskie Vybory v Kazakhstane 2007. 2007. Moskva: Moskovskii gos. universitet. Istoricheskii
fakul'tet.
Vybory-2007--Novyi Etap v Razvitii Politicheskoi Sistemy Respubliki Kazakhstan. 2007. Almaty:
Kazakhstanskii institut strategicheskikh issledovanii pri Prezidente Respubliki Kazakhstan.
Zashchita Izbiratelnykh Prav Grazhdan v Khode Munitsipalnoi Reformy v Rostovskoi Oblasti (2004--2005
Gg.). 2007. Rostov-na-Donu: Izbiratel naia komissiia Rostovskoi oblasti.
Andreescu, Marius. 2007. Principiul Proportionalitatii În Dreptul Constitutional. Bucuresti: Editura C.H.
Beck.
Andrushko, Petro P. 2007. Zlochyny Proty Vyborchykh Prav Hromadian Ta Ďkh Prava Braty Uchast u
Referendumi Kryminal No-Pravova Kharakterystyka. Kyiv: KNT.
`Atiyah, al-Tayyib H. 2007. Al-Intikhabat. al-Tab`ah 1 ed. al-Khartum: Ma`had Abhath al-Salam, Jami`at
al-Khartum.
Baglai, Marat V. 2008. Prezidenty Rossiiskoi Federatsii i Soedinennykh Shtatov Ameriki Rol, Poriadok
Vyborov, Polnomochiia. Moskva: Norma/Norma (Russia/Moskva).
Behnke, Joachim. 2007. Das Wahlsystem Der Bundesrepublik Deutschland Logik, Technik Und Praxis Der
Verhältniswahl. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Chernyshov, A. 2007. Vybory v Rossii--Vybor Dlia Rossii. Moskva: Globulus.
Chon, Hak-son, Sang-u Chong, and Hyon-ch o. Kang. 2007. Son'Go Kwallyon Pomnyong Ui Pomnyong
Yongo Wa Munjang Ui Munjechom Kwa Kaeson Pangan. Soul T`ukpyolsi: Han'guk Popche Yon'guwon.
Davydovych, IA. V. and TSentral na vyborcha komisiia Ukraďny. 2007. Mizhnarodna Naukovo-
Praktychna Konferentsiia "Vybory, 2006--Dosvid, Problemy, Perspektyvy": Vybory, 2006--Dosvid,
Problemy, Perspektyvy Zbirnyk Materialiv Mizhnarodnoď Naukovo-Praktychnoď Konferentsiď Kyďv, 31
Zhovtnia--1 Lystopada 2006 Roku. Kyiv: TSentral na vyborcha komisiia. Atika.
Golovin, A. G. 2007. Izbiratelnoe Pravo Rossii Kurs Lektsii. Moskva: Norma.
Guillemaut, André. 2007. Le Jeu Des 7 Familles Politiques Extrême Gauche, Parti Communiste, Les Verts,
Parti Socialiste, UDF, UMP, Extrême Droite. Paris: Publibook.
Hakobyan, H. H. 2007. Parlamente Ev Parlamentarizme Hayastani Hanrapetut`Yunum. Erevan: Tigran
Mets hratarakch`ut`yun.
Helg, Felix. 2007. Die Schweizerischen Landsgemeinden Ihre Staatsrechtliche Ausgestaltung in Den
Kantonen Appenzell Ausserrhoden, Appenzell Innerrhoden, Glarus, Nidwalden Und Obwalden. Zürich:
Schulthess.
Hirano, Hiroshi. 2007. Hen'Yosuru Nihon No Shakai to Tohyo Kodo = Changes in the Voting Behavior of
Japanese Society. Dai 1-han ed. Tokyo: Bokutakusha.
Iio, Jun. 2007. Nihon No Tochi Kozo Kanryo Naikakusei Kara Giin Naikakusei e. Tokyo: Chuo Koron
Shinsha.
Indonesia and Eko Jaya, CV. 2008. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 2 Tahun 2008 Tentang

22
Partai Politik. Cet. 1 ed. Jakarta: Eko Jaya.
Instytut vyborchoho prava (Ukraine). 2007. Shliakhy Optymizatsiď Vyborchoď Systemy Dlia Parlaments
Kykh Ta Mistsevykh Vyboriv v Ukraďni M. Kyďv, 20 Bereznia 2007 Roku : Dopovidi, Vystupy, Materialy
Kruhloho Stolu. Kyiv: Foliant.
Kim, Hon-t a. and Han'guk Sahoe Yoron Yon'guso. 2007. 17-Tae Taeson, Saeroun Seryok Kwa Noson Ui
Tae Ch`Ungdol 12-Wol Taeson Kwa Ku Hu Ui Han'Guk Sahoe e Taehae Algo Sip`Un Yorogaji Koktul.
Che 1-p`an ed. Soul T`ukpyolsi: U-buk.
Lépinard, Eléonore. 2007. L'Égalité Introuvable La Parité, Les Féministes Et La République. Paris: Presses
de la fondation nationale des sciences politiques.
Mikhaleva, Nadezhda A. 2007. Parlamentskie i Prezidentskie Vybory v Rossii. Moskva: Formula
prava/Formula prava (Russia/Moskva).
Nardella, Dario. 2007. Legge Elettorale e Forma Di Governo Ipotesi Per Una Riforma Condivisa. Firenze:
Polistampa. Fondazione Spadolini Nuova antologia.
Olinga, Alain D. 2007. Le Nouvel Environnement Juridique Et Institutionnel Des Élections Au Cameroun.
Yaoundé, Cameroun: Presses universitaires d'Afrique.
Parada Rivero, Walter. 2007. Constitución o Fraude? Autonomía : Unidad : Proceso Constituyente.
Bolivia.
Rojas Benítez, Expedito, Gustavo Rojas Bogado, and Paraguay. 2007. Derecho Electoral Positivo
Comentarios Sobre El Código Electoral. Asunción: Ediciones Librería El Foro.
Rojas Díaz Durán, Alejandro and Ricardo Colina Rubio. 2007. La Participación Ciudadana. México, D.F:
Editorial Porrúa.
Ser ohina, O. V. 2007. Verkhovna Rada Ukraďny. Kyiv: Maisternia knyhy.
Touvet, Laurent and Yves-Marie Doublet. 2007. Droit Des Élections. Paris: Economica.
Vincent, Jean-Yves, Michel De Villiers, and France. 2007. Code Électoral 2007. 8e éd., [texte à jour au 31
décembre 2006] ed. Paris: Litec.
Zhang, Pengyuan. 2007. Zhongguo Min Zhu Zheng Zhi De Kun Jing (1909-1949) Wan Qing Yi Lai Li Jie Yi
Hui Xuan Ju Shu Lun. Chu ban ed. Taibei Shi: Lian jing chu ban shi ye gu fen you xian gong si.
Journal Articles
Aarts, Kees and Henk van der Kolk. 2007. "The Parliamentary Election in the Netherlands, 22 November
2006."Electoral Studies 26(4):832-37.
Abramson, Paul R. 2007. "The French Presidential Election of 2007: Was Sarkozy the Condorcet Winner?"
French Politics 5(September):287-91.
Abramson, Paul R., Abraham Diskin, and Dan S. Felsenthal. 2007. "Nonvoting and the Decisiveness of
Electoral Outcomes." Political Research Quarterly 60(3):500-515.
Adler, Scott E. and John D. Wilkerson. 2008. "Intended Consequences: Jurisdictional Reform and Issue
Control in the U.S. House of Representatives." Legislative Studies Quarterly 33(February ):85-112.
Aidt, Toke S. and Bianca Dallal. 2008. "Female Voting Power: The Contribution of Women’s Suffrage to
the Growth of Social Spending in Western Europe (1869–1960)." Public Choice 134(3-4):391-417.
Aili Mari Tripp and Alice Kang. 2008. "The Global Impact of Quotas: On the Fast Track to Increased
Female Legislative Representation." Comparative Political Studies 41(3):338-61.
Akarca, Ali T. and Aysit Tansel. 2007. "Social and Economic Determinants of Turkish Voter Choice in the
1995 Parliamentary Election." Electoral Studies 26(3):633-47.
Ansolabehere, Stephen, John M. Hansen, Shigeo Hirano, and James M. Snyder Jr. 2007. "The Incumbency
Advantage in U.S. Primary Elections." Electoral Studies 26(3):660-668.
Antweiler, Werner. 2007. "Estimating Voter Migration in Canada Using Generalized Maximum Entropy."
Electoral Studies 26(4):756-71.
Arter, David. 2007. "The End of the Social Democratic Hegemony? The March 2007 Finnish General
Election." West European Politics 30(5):1148-57.
Atkeson, Lonna R. and Kyle L. Saunders. 2007. "The Effect of Election Administration on Voter
Confidence: A Local Matter?" PS: Political Science & Politics 40(04):655-60.
Back, Hanna. 2008. "Intra-Party Politics and Coalition Formation: Evidence From Swedish Local
Government." Party Politics 14(1):71-89.
Bali, Valentina A. 2007. "Terror and Elections: Lessons From Spain." Electoral Studies 26(3):669-87.
Balkir, Canan. 2007. "The July 2007 Elections in Turkey: A Test for Democracy." Mediterranean Politics
12(3):415-22.
Bardi, Luciano. 2007. "Electoral Change and Its Impact on the Party System in Italy." West European

23
Politics 30(4):711-32.
Bardi, Luciano and Peter Mair. 2008. "The Parameters of Party Systems." Party Politics 14(2):147-66.
Barretto, Matt A. 2007. "Latino Candidates and the Mobilization of Latino Voters." American Political
Science Review 101(3):425-41.
Barrow, Lynda K. 2007. "Party On? Politicians and Party Switching in Mexico." Politics 27(3):165-73.
Battaglini, Marco, Rebecca Morton, and Thomas Palfrey. 2007. "Efficiency, Equity, and Timing of Voting
Mechanisms." American Political Science Review 101(3):409-24.
Beckwith, Karen and Kimberly Cowell-Meyers. 2007. "Sheer Numbers: Critical Representation Thresholds
and Women's Political Representation." Perspectives on Politics 5(3):553-65.
Behnke, Joachim. 2007. "The Strange Phenomenon of Surplus Seats in the German Electoral System."
German Politics 16(4):496-517.
Bellucci, Paolo. 2008. " The Parliamentary Election in Italy, April 2006." Electoral Studies 27(1):185-90.
Bereni, Laure. 2007. "French Feminists Renegotiate Republican Universalism: The Gender Parity
Campaign." French Politics 5(September):191-209.
Bernhagen, Patrick and Michael Marsh. 2007. "The Partisan Effects of Low Turnout: Analyzing Vote
Abstention as a Missing Data Problem." Electoral Studies 26(3):548-60.
Berry, Christopher R. and William G. Howell. 2007. "Accountability and Local Elections: Rethinking
Retrospective Voting." The Journal of Politics 69(3):844-58.
Birch, Sarah. 2007. "Electoral Systems and Electoral Misconduct." Comparative Political Studies
40(12):1533-56.
Bjorklund, Tor. 2007. "Unemployment and the Radical Right in Scandinavia: Beneficial or Non-Beneficial
for Electoral Support?" Comparative European Politics 5(September):245-63.
Blais, Andre, Jean-Francois Laslier, Annie Laurent, Nicolas Sauger, and Karine Van der Straeten. 2007.
"One-Round Vs Two-Round Elections: An Experimental Study." French Politics 5(September ):278-86.
Blau, Adrian. 2008. "The Effective Number of Parties at Four Scales: Votes, Seats, Legislative Power and
Cabinet Power." Party Politics 14(2):167-87.
Boatright, Robert G. 2008. "Who Are the Spatial Voting Violators?" Electoral Studies 27(1):116-25.
Bochsler, Daniel. 2008. "The Parliamentary Election in Serbia, 21 January 2007." Electoral Studies
27(1):160-165.
Bogaards, Matthijs. 2008. "Dominant Party Systems and Electoral Volatility in Africa: A Comment on
Mozaffar and Scarritt." Party Politics 14(1):113-30.
Bogaards, Matthijs. 2007. "Measuring Democracy Through Election Outcomes: A Critique With African
Data." Comparative Political Studies 40(10):1211-37.
Borisyuk, Galina, Colin Rallings, Michael Thrasher, and Henk van der Kolk. 2007. "Voter Support for
Minor Parties: Assessing the Social and Political Context of Voting at the 2004 European Elections in
Greater London." Party Politics 13(6):669-93.
Born, Richard. 2008. "Party Polarization and the Rise of Partisan Voting in U.S. House Elections."
American Politics Research 36(1):62-84.
Bowler, Shaun and Todd Donovan. 2007. "Reasoning About Institutional Change: Winners, Losers and
Support for Electoral Reforms." British Journal of Political Science 37(3):455-76.
Brandt, Loren and Matthew A. Turner. 2007. "The Usefulness of Imperfect Elections: The Case of Village
Elections in Rural China." Economics & Politics 19(3):453-80.
Buchler, Justin. 2007. "The Statistical Properties of Competitive Districts: What the Central Limit Theorem
Can Teach Us About Election Reform." PS: Political Science & Politics 40(2):333-37.
Buckley, Fiona, Neil Collins, and Theresa Reidy. 2007. "Ballot Paper Photographs and Low-Information
Elections in Ireland." Politics 27(3):174-81.
Burden, Barry C. 2007. "Ballot Regulations and Multiparty Politics in the States." PS: Political Science &
Politics 40(4):669-73.
Callander, Steven and Catherine H. Wilson. 2007. "Turnout, Polarization, and Duverger's Law." The
Journal of Politics 69(4):1047-56.
Calvo, Ernesto. 2007. "The Responsive Legislature: Public Opinion and Law Making in a Highly
Disciplined Legislature." British Journal of Political Science 37(02):263-80.
Canes-Wrone, Brandice and Kenneth W. Shotts. 2007. "When Do Elections Encourage Ideological
Rigidity?" American Political Science Review 101(2):273-88.
Carson, Jamie L., Michael H. Crespin, Charles J. Finocchiaro, and David W. Rohde. 2007. "Redistricting
and Party Polarization in the U.S. House of Representatives." American Politics Research 35(6):878-904.

24
Carson, Jamie L., Erik J. Engstrom, and Jason M. Roberts. 2007. "Candidate Quality, the Personal Vote,
and the Incumbency Advantage in Congress." American Political Science Review 101(2):289-301.
Chaisty, Paul. 2007. "The Influence of Sectoral and Regional Economic Interests on Russian Legislative
Behavior: The Case of State Duma Voting on Production Sharing Agreements Legislation." Post Soviet
Affairs 23(October):302-28.
Charalambous, Giorgos. 2007. "The Strongest Communists in Europe: Accounting for AKEL's Electoral
Success." Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 23(3):425-56.
Chin, James. 2007. "The General Election in Singapore, May 2006." Electoral Studies 26(3):703-7.
Clough, Emily. 2007. "Strategic Voting Under Conditions of Uncertainty: A Re-Evaluation of Duverger's
Law." British Journal of Political Science 37( 2):313-32.
Clough, Emily. 2007. "Talking Locally and Voting Globally: Duverger's Law and Homogeneous
Discussion Networks." Political Research Quarterly 60(3):531-40.
Clough, Emily. 2007. "Two Political Worlds?: The Influence of Provincial Party Loyalty Federal Voting in
Canada." Electoral Studies 26(4):787-96.
Cole, Alexandra. 2008. "Small but Significant: Why Small Parties Benefit From a Presidentialised German
Party System." German Politics 17(1):10-26.
Conaghan, Catherine M. 2007. "The 2006 Presidential and Congressional Elections in Ecuador." Electoral
Studies 26(4):823-28.
Criado, Henar. 2008. "The Effects of Party Mobilisation Strategies on the Vote: The PSOE and the PP in
the 1996 Spanish Election." European Journal of Political Research 47(1):80-100.
Crisp, Brian F. 2007. "Incentives in Mixed-Member Electoral Systems: General Election Laws, Candidate
Selection Procedures, and Cameral Rules." Comparative Political Studies 40(12):1460-1485.
Crisp, Brian F., Kathryn M. Jensen, and Yael Shomer. 2007. "Magnitude and Vote Seeking." Electoral
Studies 26(4):727-34.
Crowther, William E. and Irmina Matonyte. 2007. "Parliamentary Elites As a Democratic Thermometer:
Estonia, Lithuania and Moldova Compared." Communist and Post-Communist Studies 40(3):281-99.
Cusack, Thomas R., Torben Iversen, and David Soskice. 2007. "Economic Interests and the Origins of
Electoral Systems." American Political Science Review 101(3):373-91.
Dal Bo, Ernesto. 2007. "Bribing Voters." American Journal of Political Science 51(4):789-803.
De Sio, Lorenzo. 2008. "Are Less-Involved Voters the Key to Win Elections?" Comparative Political
Studies 41(2):217-41.
Decker, Frank and Florian Hartleb. 2007. "Populism on Difficult Terrain: The Right- and Left-Wing
Challenger Parties in the Federal Republic of Germany." German Politics 16(4):434-54.
Den Hartog, Chris and Nathan W. Monroe. 2008. "The Value of Majority Status: The Effect of Jeffords's
Switch on Asset Prices of Republican and Democratic Firms." Legislative Studies Quarterly 33(February
):63-84.
Detterbeck, Klaus. 2008. "Party Cartel and Cartel Parties in Germany." German Politics 17(1):27-40.
Diamanti, Ilvo. 2007. "The Italian Centre-Right and Centre-Left: Between Parties and 'The Party'." West
European Politics 30(4):733-62.
Dietrich, Franz and Christian List. 2007. "Judgment Aggregation By Quota Rules: Majority Voting
Generalized." Journal of Theoretical Politics 19(4):391-424.
Diskin, Abraham, Andre Eschet-Schwarz, and Dan S. Felsenthal. 2007. "Homogeneity, Heterogeneity and
Direct Democracy: The Case of Swiss Referenda." Canadian Journal of Political Science 40(02):317-
42.
Diskin, Abraham and Reuven Y. Hazan. 2007. "The Knesset Election in Israel, March 2006." Electoral
Studies 26( 3):707-11.
Donovan, Barbara. 2007. "Minority Representation in Germany." German Politics 16(4):455-80.
Donovan, Todd. 2007. "A Goal for Reform: Make Elections Worth Stealing." PS: Political Science &
Politics 40(04):681-86.
Drake, Helen. 2007. "All Change Here? The French Presidential and Parliamentary Elections of 2007."
Mediterranean Politics 12(3):423-29.
Dris-Ait-Hamadouche, Louisa. 2008. "The 2007 Legislative Elections in Algeria: Political Reckonings."
Mediterranean Politics 13(1):87-94.
Duina, Francesco. 2007. "Domestic Actors and Europeanization: Why Fit Still Matters." Comparative
European Politics 5(September):339-41.
Elff, Martin. 2007. "Social Structure and Electoral Behavior in Comparative Perspective: The Decline of

25
Social Cleavages in Western Europe Revisited." Perspectives on Politics 5(2):277-94.
Eom, Kihong and Donald A. Gross. 2007. "Democratization Effects of Campaign Contribution Limits in
Gubernatorial Elections." Party Politics 13(6):695-720.
Ezrow, Lawrence. 2008. "Research Note: On the Inverse Relationship Between Votes and Proximity for
Niche Parties." European Journal of Political Research 47(2):206-20.
Fieldhouse, Edward, Mark Tranmer, and Andrew Russell. 2007. "Something about Young People or
Something about Elections? Electoral Participation of Young People in Europe: Evidence From a
Multilevel Analysis of the European Social Survey." European Journal of Political Research 46(6):797-
822.
Finocchiaro, Charles J. and David W. Rohde. 2008. "War for the Floor: Partisan Theory and Agenda
Control in the U.S. House of Representatives." Legislative Studies Quarterly 33(February):35-61.
Fisher, Stephen D. 2007. "(Change in) Turnout and (Change in) the Left Share of the Vote." Electoral
Studies 26(3):598-611.
Fisher, Stephen D., Laurence Lessard-Phillips, Sara B. Hobolt, and John Curtice. 2008. "Disengaging
Voters: Do Plurality Systems Discourage the Less Knowledgeable From Voting?" Electoral Studies
27(1):89-104.
Fraenkel, Jon and Bernard Grofman. 2007. "The Merits of Neo-Downsian Modeling of the Alternative
Vote: A Reply to Horowitz." Public Choice 133(1-2):1-11.
Freire, Andre. 2008. "Party Polarization and Citizens' Left--Right Orientations." Party Politics 14(2):189-
209.
Frisina, Laurin, Michael C. Herron, James Honaker, and Jeffrey B. Lewis. 2008. "Ballot Formats,
Touchscreens, and Undervotes: A Study of the 2006 Midterm Elections in Florida." Election Law
Journal 7(1):25-47.
Ganiel, Gladys. 2007. "'Preaching to the Choir?' An Analysis of DUP Discourses about the Northern
Ireland Peace Process." Irish Political Studies 22(September):303-20.
Gawn, Ryan. 2007. "Truth Cohabitation: A Truth Commission for Northern Ireland?" Irish Political
Studies 22(September):339-61.
Gay, Claudine. 2007. "Legislating Without Constraints: The Effect of Minority Districting on Legislators'
Responsiveness to Constituency Preferences." The Journal of Politics 69(2):442-56.
Gemenis, Kostas. 2008. "The 2007 Parliamentary Election in Greece." Mediterranean Politics 13(1):95-
101.
Gerrity, Jessica C., Tracy Osborn, and Jeanette M. Mendez. 2007. "Women and Representation: A
Different View of the District?" Politics & Gender 3(2):179-200.
Gidengil, Elisabeth, Allison Harell, and Bonnie H. Erickson. 2007. "Network Diversity and Vote Choice:
Women's Social Ties and Left Voting in Canada." Politics & Gender 3(2):151-77.
Gilardi, Fabrizio. 2007. "The Same, But Different: Central Banks, Regulatory Agencies, and the Politics of
Delegation to Independent Authorities." Comparative European Politics 5(September):303-27.
Gimpel, James G., Kimberly A. Karnes, John McTague, and Shanna Pearson-Merkowitz. 2008. "Distance-
Decay in the Political Geography of Friends-and-Neighbors Voting." Political Geography 27(2):231-52.
Gimpel, James G., Karen M. Kaufmann, and Shanna Pearson-Merkowitz. 2007. "Battleground States
Versus Blackout States: The Behavioral Implications of Modern Presidential Campaigns." The Journal of
Politics 69(3):786-97.
Gomez, Brad T., Thomas G. Hansford, and George A. Krause. 2007. "The Republicans Should Pray for
Rain: Weather, Turnout, and Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections." The Journal of Politics 69(3):649-
63.
Goodman, Craig and Gregg R. Murray. 2007. "Do You See What I See? Perceptions of Party Differences
and Voting Behavior." American Politics Research 35(6):905-31.
Green, Jane. 2007. "When Voters and Parties Agree: Valence Issues and Party Competition." Political
Studies 55(3):629-55.
Green-Pedersen, Christoffer. 2007. "The Growing Importance of Issue Competition: The Changing Nature
of Party Competition in Western Europe." Political Studies 55(3):607-28.
Greene, Kenneth F. 2008. "Dominant Party Strategy and Democratization." American Journal of Political
Science 52(1):16-31.
Gronke, Paul, Eva Galanes-Rosenbaum, and Peter A. Miller. 2007. "Early Voting and Turnout." PS:
Political Science & Politics 40(4):639-45.
Hakhverdian, Armen and Christel Koop. 2007. "Consensus Democracy and Support for Populist Parties in

26
Western Europe." Acta Politica 42(December):401-20.
Hall, Thad, J. Q. Monson, and Kelly D. Patterson . 2007. "Poll Workers and the Vitality of Democracy: An
Early Assessment." PS: Political Science & Politics 40(4):647-54.
Han, Jeong-Hun. 2007. "Analysing Roll Calls of the European Parliament: A Bayesian Application."
European Union Politics 8(4):479-507.
Harfst, Philipp. 2007. " The Politics of Electoral Systems." Acta Politica 42(December):466-68.
Hartlyn, Jonathan, Jennifer McCoy, and Thomas M. Mustillo. 2008. "Electoral Governance Matters:
Explaining the Quality of Elections in Contemporary Latin America." Comparative Political Studies
41(1):73-98.
Hasecke, Edward B. and Jason D. Mycoff. 2007. "Party Loyalty and Legislative Success: Are Loyal
Majority Party Members More Successful in the U.S. House of Representatives?" Political Research
Quarterly 60(4):607-17.
Heckelman, Jac C. and Andrew J. Yates. 2008. "Senate Elections with Independent Candidates." Journal of
Theoretical Politics 20(1):31-46.
Heinrich, Gudrun and Steffen Schoon. 2007. "The 2006 Landtag Election in Mecklenburg-Western
Pomerania." German Politics 16(4):526-33.
Hellwig, Timothy. 2007. "Economic Openness, Policy Uncertainty, and the Dynamics of Government
Support." Electoral Studies 26(4):772-86.
Hicken, Allen and Joel W. Simmons. 2008. "The Personal Vote and the Efficacy of Education Spending."
American Journal of Political Science 52(1):109-24.
Hillygus, D. S. 2007. "The Dynamics of Voter Decision Making Among Minor-Party Supporters: The 2000
Presidential Election in the United States." British Journal of Political Science 37(2):225-44.
Hinich, Melvin, Valerii Khmelko, Marianna Klochko, and Peter C. Ordeshook. 2008. "A Coalition Lost,
Then Found: A Spatial Analysis of Ukraine's 2006 and 2007 Parliamentary Elections." Post Soviet
Affairs 24(1):63-96.
Hirano, Shigeo. 2008. "Third Parties, Elections, and Roll-Call Votes: The Populist Party and the Late
Nineteenth-Century U.S. Congress." Legislative Studies Quarterly 33(February):131-60.
Hix, Simon and Michael Marsh. 2007. "Punishment or Protest? Understanding European Parliament
Elections." The Journal of Politics 69(2):495-510.
Hood, M. V. and Seth C. McKee. 2008. "Gerrymandering on Georgia's Mind: The Effects of Redistricting
on Vote Choice in the 2006 Midterm Election*." Social Science Quarterly 89(1):60-77.
Horowitz, Donald L. 2007. "Where Have All the Parties Gone? Fraenkel and Grofman on the Alternative
Vote - Yet Again." Public Choice 133(1-2):13-23.
Huckfeldt, Robert, Edward G. Carmines, Jeffery J. Mondak, and Eric Zeemering. 2007. "Information,
Activation, and Electoral Competition in the 2002 Congressional Elections." The Journal of Politics
69(3):798-812.
Indridason, Indridi H. 2008. "When to Run and When to Hide: Electoral Coordination and Exit."
Economics & Politics 20(1):80-105.
Ivaldi, Gilles. 2007. "Presidential Strategies, Models of Leadership and the Development of Parties in a
Candidate-Centred Polity: The 2007 UMP and PS Presidential Nomination Campaigns." French Politics
5(September ):253-77.
Ivarsflaten, Elisabeth. 2008. "What Unites Right-Wing Populists in Western Europe?: Re-Examining
Grievance Mobilization Models in Seven Successful Cases." Comparative Political Studies 41(1):3-23.
Jhee, Byong-Kuen. 2008. "Economic Origins of Electoral Support for Authoritarian Successors: A Cross-
National Analysis of Economic Voting in New Democracies." Comparative Political Studies 41(3):362-
88.
Johnston, Richard, J. S. Matthews, and Amanda Bittner. 2007. "Turnout and the Party System in Canada,
1988-2004." Electoral Studies 26(4):735-45.
Justesen, Mogens K. 2007. "The Social Choice of EU Treaties: Discrepancies Between Voter Preferences
and Referendum Outcomes in Denmark." European Union Politics 8(4):537-53.
Kara, Ahmet. 2007. "The Parliamentary Elections in Azerbaijan, November 2005 and May 2006."
Electoral Studies 26(3):720-724.
Karp, Jeffrey A. and Susan A. Banducci. 2008. "When Politics Is Not Just a Man's Game: Women's
Representation and Political Engagement." Electoral Studies 27(1):105-15.
Karp, Jeffrey A. and Marshall W. Garland. 2007. "Ideological Ambiguity and Split Ticket Voting."
Political Research Quarterly 60(4):722-32.

27
Kasuya, Yuko and Johannes Moenius. 2008. "The Nationalization of Party Systems: Conceptual Issues and
Alternative District-Focused Measures." Electoral Studies 27(1):126-35.
Kausch, Kristina. 2008. "Elections 2007: The Most Transparent Status Quo in Moroccan History."
Mediterranean Politics 13(1):79-85.
Kehrberg, Jason E. 2007. "Public Opinion on Immigration in Western Europe: Economics, Tolerance, and
Exposure." Comparative European Politics 5(September ):264-81.
Kestila, Elina and Peter Soderlund. 2007. "Subnational Political Opportunity Structures and the Success of
the Radical Right: Evidence From the March 2004 Regional Elections in France." European Journal of
Political Research 46(6):773-96.
Kim, HeeMin, Jun Y. Choi, and Jinman Cho. 2008. "Changing Cleavage Structure in New Democracies:
An Empirical Analysis of Political Cleavages in Korea." Electoral Studies 27(1):136-50.
Klemmensen, Robert, Sara B. Hobolt, and Martin E. Hansen. 2007. "Estimating Policy Positions Using
Political Texts: An Evaluation of the Wordscores Approach." Electoral Studies 26(4):746-55.
Klesner, Joseph L. 2007. "The July 2006 Presidential and Congressional Elections in Mexico." Electoral
Studies 26(4):803-8.
Kostadinova, Tatiana and Timothy J. Power. 2007. "Does Democratization Depress Participation? Voter
Turnout in the Latin American and Eastern European Transitional Democracies." Political Research
Quarterly 60(3):363-77.
Kousser, Thad, Jeffrey B. Lewis, and Seth E. Masket. 2007. "Ideological Adaptation? The Survival Instinct
of Threatened Legislators." The Journal of Politics 69(3):828-43.
Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2008. "Political Mobilisation, Political Participation and the Power of the Vote." West
European Politics 31(1):147-68.
Kroh, Martin. 2007. "A Unified Theory of Party Competition: A Cross-National Analysis Integrating
Spatial and Behavioral Factors." Acta Politica 42( December):476-78.
Lacroix, Justine. 2007. "A Liberal Defence of Compulsory Voting." Politics 27(3):190-195.
Ladrech, Robert. 2007. "National Political Parties and European Governance: The Consequences of
Missing in Action." West European Politics 30(5):945-60.
Laffin, Martin. 2007. "Coalition-Formation and Centre Periphery Relations in a National Political Party:
The Liberal Democrats in a Devolved Britain." Party Politics 13 (6):651-68.
Lago, Ignacio. 2008. "Rational Expectations or Heuristics?: Strategic Voting in Proportional
Representation Systems." Party Politics 14(1):31-49.
Lane, Jan-Erik and Reinert Maeland. 2007. "Towards an Analysis of Voting Power in Parliament: An
Exploration into Coalition-Making in Nordic Parliaments." Acta Politica 42(December):355-79.
Larcinese, Valentino. 2007. "Voting Over Redistribution and the Size of the Welfare State: The Role of
Turnout." Political Studies 55(3):568-85.
Lazarus, Jeffrey. 2008. "Incumbent Vulnerability and Challenger Entry in Statewide Elections." American
Politics Research 36(1):108-29.
Lean, Sharon F. 2007. "The Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in Nicaragua, November 2006."
Electoral Studies 26(4):828-32.
LeDuc, Lawrence. 2007. "The Federal Election in Canada, January 2006." Electoral Studies 26(3):716-20.
Leighley, Jan E. and Jonathan Nagler. 2007. "Unions, Voter Turnout, and Class Bias in the U.S. Electorate,
1964-2004." The Journal of Politics 69(2):430-441.
Lewis-Beck, Michael S., Richard Nadeau, and Angelo Elias. 2008. "Economics, Party, and the Vote:
Causality Issues and Panel Data." American Journal of Political Science 52(1):84-95.
Lien, Pei-te, Dianne M. Pinderhughes, Carol Hardy-Fanta, and Christine M. Sierra. 2007. "The Voting
Rights Act and the Election of Nonwhite Officials." PS: Political Science & Politics 40(03):489-94.
Lundberg, Thomas C. 2007. "Electoral System Reviews in New Zealand, Britain and Canada: A Critical
Comparison." Government and Opposition 42(4):471-90.
Lundy, Patricia and Mark McGovern. 2007. "Attitudes Towards a Truth Commission for Northern Ireland
in Relation to Party Political Affiliation." Irish Political Studies 22(September):321-38.
Lutz, Georg. 2007. "Low Turnout in Direct Democracy." Electoral Studies 26(3):624-32.
Lutz, Georg and Michael Marsh. 2007. "Introduction: Consequences of Low Turnout." Electoral Studies
26(3):539-47.
Magee, Christopher S. P. 2007. "Influence, Elections, and the Value of a Vote in the U.S. House of
Representatives." Economics & Politics 19(3):289-315.
Mahler, Vincent A. 2008. "Electoral Turnout and Income Redistribution by the State: A Cross-National

28
Analysis of the Developed Democracies." European Journal of Political Research 47(2):161-83.
Mair, Peter. 2008. "The Challenge to Party Government." West European Politics 31(1):211-34.
McDonald, Michael P. 2007. "Regulating Redistricting." PS: Political Science & Politics 40(4):675-79.
McElroy, Gail. 2007. "Legislative Politics As Normal?: Voting Behaviour and Beyond in the European
Parliament." European Union Politics 8(3):433-48.
McElwain, Kenneth M. 2008. "Manipulating Electoral Rules to Manufacture Single-Party Dominance."
American Journal of Political Science 52(1):32-47.
McEvoy, Joanne. 2007. "The Northern Ireland Assembly Election 2007." Irish Political Studies
22(September):367-81.
McGhee, Eric. 2008. "Cohort Effects and the Incumbency Advantage." Legislative Studies Quarterly
33(February):113-29.
Mckay, Joanna. 2007. "The Berlin Land Election 2006." German Politics 16(4):518-25.
Merckx, Marieke and Patrick Vander Weyden. 2007. "Parliamentary and Presidential Elections in the
Democratic Republic of Congo, 2006." Electoral Studies 26(4):809-13.
Mershon, Carol and Olga Shvetsova. 2008. "Parliamentary Cycles and Party Switching in Legislatures."
Comparative Political Studies 41(1):99-127.
Meszaros, Jozsef, Norbert Solymosi, and Ferenc Speiser. 2007. "Spatial Distribution of Political Parties in
Hungary 1990-2006." Political Geography 26(7):804-23.
Milkis, Sidney M. and Jesse H. Rhodes. 2007. "George W. Bush, the Republican Party, and the New
American Party System." Perspectives on Politics 5(3):461-88.
Moller, Jorgen. 2007. "The Gap Between Electoral and Liberal Democracy Revisited. Some Conceptual
and Empirical Clarifications." Acta Politica 42(December):380-400.
Moraski, Bryon. 2007. "Electoral System Reform in Democracy's Grey Zone: Lessons From Putin's
Russia." Government and Opposition 42(4):536-63.
Morel, Laurence. 2007. "The Rise of Politically Obligatory Referendums: The 2005 French Referendum in
Comparative Perspective." West European Politics 30(5):1041-67.
Moser, Robert G. 2008. "Electoral Systems and the Representation of Ethnic Minorities: Evidence From
Russia." Comparative Politics 40(3).
Muller, Wolfgang C. 2008. "The Surprising Election in Austria, October 2006." Electoral Studies
27(1):175-79.
Neumayer, Laure. 2008. " Euroscepticism As a Political Label: The Use of European Union Issues in
Political Competition in the New Member States." European Journal of Political Research 47(2):135-60.
Nicolau, Jairo. 2008. "The Presidential and Congressional Elections in Brazil, October 2006." Electoral
Studies 27(1):170-175.
Nikolenyi, Csaba. 2008. "Recognition Rules, Party Labels and the Number of Parties in India: A Research
Note." Party Politics 14(2):211-22.
Nurmi, Hannu and Lasse Nurmi. 2007. "The Parliamentary Election in Finland, March 2007." Electoral
Studies 26( 4):797-803.
O'Mahony, Jane. 2007. "'Europeanisation As Implementation': The Impact of the European Union on
Environmental Policy-Making in Ireland." Irish Political Studies 22(September):265-85.
O'Malley, Eoin. 2007. "The Irish Parliamentary Elections of 2007: New Gloss on an Old Engine." West
European Politics 30(5):1158-65.
O Muineachain, Sein and Michael Gallagher. 2008. "The Parliamentary Election in Ireland, May 2007."
Electoral Studies 27(1):151-54.
Oliver, J. E. and Shang E. Ha. 2007. "Vote Choice in Suburban Elections." American Political Science
Review 101(3):393-408.
Pappalardo, Adriano. 2007. "Electoral Systems, Party Systems: Lijphart and Beyond." Party Politics
13(6):721-40.
Pellikaan, Huib, Sarah L. d. Lange, and Tom v. d. Meer. 2007. "Fortuyns Legacy: Party System Change in
the Netherlands." Comparative European Politics 5(September):282-302.
Pereira, Carlos, Timothy J. Power, and Lucio R. Renno. 2008. "Agenda Power, Executive Decree
Authority, and the Mixed Results of Reform in the Brazilian Congress." Legislative Studies Quarterly
33(February):5-33.
Pettersen, Per A. and Lawrence E. Rose. 2007. "The Dog That Didn't Bark: Would Increased Electoral
Turnout Make a Difference?" Electoral Studies 26(3):574-88.
Plecita-Vlachova, Klara and Mary Stegmaier. 2008. "The Parliamentary Election in the Czech Republic,

29
June 2006." Electoral Studies 27(1):179-84.
Poguntke, Thomas, Nicholas Aylott, Robert Ladrech, and Kurt R. Luther. 2007. "The Europeanisation of
National Party Organisations: A Conceptual Analysis." European Journal of Political Research
46(6):747-71.
Prather, Lauren and Erik S. Herron. 2007. "Enfranchising Displaced Voters: Lessons From Bosnia-
Herzegovina." Election Law Journal 6(4):354-71.
Rakner, Lise, Lars Svasand, and Nixon S. Khembo. 2007. "Fissions and Fusions, Foes and Friends: Party
System Restructuring in Malawi in the 2004 General Elections." Comparative Political Studies
40(9):1112-37.
Reilly, Benjamin. 2007. "Democratization and Electoral Reform in the Asia-Pacific Region: Is There an
"Asian Model" of Democracy?" Comparative Political Studies 40(11):1350-1371.
Remmer, Karen L. 2008. "The Politics of Institutional Change: Electoral Reform in Latin America, 1978
2002." Party Politics 14(1):5-30.
Rohrschneider, Robert and Stephen Whitefield. 2007. "Representation in New Democracies: Party Stances
on European Integration in Post-Communist Eastern Europe." The Journal of Politics 69(4):1133-46.
Rosar, Ulrich, Markus Klein, and Tilo Beckers. 2008. "The Frog Pond Beauty Contest: Physical
Attractiveness and Electoral Success of the Constituency Candidates at the North Rhine-Westphalia State
Election of 2005." European Journal of Political Research 47(1):64-79.
Rosema, Martin. 2007. "Low Turnout: Threat to Democracy or Blessing in Disguise? Consequences of
Citizens' Varying Tendencies to Vote." Electoral Studies 26(3):612-23.
Rottinghaus, Brandon and Gina Baldwin. 2007. "Voting Behind Bars: Explaining Variation in International
Enfranchisement Practices." Electoral Studies 26(3):688-98.
Royall, Fredric. 2007. "Assessing the Level of the Political Mobilisation of the Unemployed in Ireland
From 1991 to 2005." Irish Political Studies 22(September):287-301.
Rubenson, Daniel, Andre Blais, Patrick Fournier, Elisabeth Gidengil, and Neil Nevitte. 2007. "Does Low
Turnout Matter? Evidence From the 2000 Canadian Federal Election." Electoral Studies 26(3):589-97.
Rybar, Marek. 2007. "The Parliamentary Election in Slovakia, June 2006." Electoral Studies 26(3):699-
703.
Saine, Abdoulaye. 2008. "Presidential and National Assembly Elections, The Gambia 2006 and 2007."
Electoral Studies 27(1):165-70.
Sauger, Nicolas. 2007. "The French Legislative and Presidential Elections of 2007." West European
Politics 30(5):1166-75.
Schmidt, Gregory D. 2007. "Back to the Future? The 2006 Peruvian General Election." Electoral Studies
26(4):813-19.
Shamir, Michal and Jacob Shamir. 2007. "The Israeli Palestinian Conflict in Israeli Elections."
International Political Science Review/ Revue Internationale De Science Pol 28(4):469-91.
Slomczynski, Kazimierz M., Goldie Shabad, and Jakub Zielinski. 2008. "Fluid Party Systems, Electoral
Rules and Accountability of Legislators in Emerging Democracies: The Case of Ukraine." Party Politics
14(1):91-112.
Small, Tamara A. 2008. "Equal Access, Unequal Success Major and Minor Canadian Parties On the Net."
Party Politics 14(1):51-70.
Spoon, Jae-Jae. 2008. "Presidential and Legislative Elections in France, April-June 2007." Electoral
Studies 27(1):155-60.
Stokes-Brown, Atiya K. and Melissa O. Neal. 2008. "Give Em Something to Talk About: The Influence of
Female Candidates' Campaign Issues on Political Proselytizing." Politics & Policy 36(1):32-59.
Strandberg, Kim. 2008. " Online Electoral Competition in Different Settings: A Comparative Meta-
Analysis of the Research on Party Websites and Online Electoral Competition." Party Politics 14(2):223-
44.
Taksin, Yuksel. 2008. "AKP's Move to Conquer the Center-Right: Its Prospects and Possible Impacts on
the Democratization Process." Turkish Studies 9(1):53-72.
Tasnadi, Attila. 2008. "The Extent of the Population Paradox in the Hungarian Electoral System." Public
Choice 134(3-4):293-305.
Tavits, Margit. 2008. "Policy Positions, Issue Importance, and Party Competition in New Democracies."
Comparative Political Studies 41(1):48-72.
Threlfall, Monica. 2007. "Explaining Gender Parity Representation in Spain: The Internal Dynamics of
Parties." West European Politics 30(5):1068-95.

30
Tolbert, Caroline. 2007. "2008 and Beyond: The Future of Election Reform in the States." PS: Political
Science & Politics 40(04):631-33.
Tucker, Joshua A. 2007. "Enough! Electoral Fraud, Collective Action Problems, and Post-Communist
Colored Revolutions." Perspectives on Politics 5(03):535-51.
Ulbig, Stacy G. 2007. "Gendering Municipal Government: Female Descriptive Representation and Feelings
of Political Trust." Social Science Quarterly 88(5):1106-23.
van der Eijk, Cees and Marcel van Egmond. 2007. "Political Effects of Low Turnout in National and
European Elections." Electoral Studies 26(3):561-73.
van Holsteyn, Joop J. M. 2007. "The Dutch Parliamentary Elections of 2006." West European Politics
30(5):1139-47.
Van Spanje, Joost and Wouter Van Der Brug. 2007. "The Party as Pariah: The Exclusion of Anti-
Immigration Parties and Its Effect on Their Ideological Positions." West European Politics 30(5):1022-
40.
Wass, Hanna. 2007. "The Effects of Age, Generation and Period on Turnout in Finland 1975-2003."
Electoral Studies 26(3):648-59.
Weber, Till. 2007. "Campaign Effects and Second-Order Cycles: A Top-Down Approach to European
Parliament Elections." European Union Politics 8(4):509-36.
Werner, Timothy and Kenneth R. Mayer. 2007. "Public Election Funding, Competition, and Candidate
Gender." PS: Political Science & Politics 40(04):661-67.
White, Stephen and Ian McAllister. 2007. "Turnout and Representation Bias in Post-Communist Europe."
Political Studies 55(3):586-606.
Widfeldt, Anders. 2007. "The Swedish Parliamentary Election of 2006." Electoral Studies 26(4):820-823.
Williams, Paul D. 2008. "The 2007 Australian Federal Election: The Story of Labor's Return From the
Electoral Wilderness." Australian Journal of Politics & History 54(1):104-25.
Wilson, Bruce M. 2007. "The General Election in Costa Rica, February 2006." Electoral Studies 26(3):712-
16.
Wilson, Kenneth. 2007. " Party Finance in Russia: Has the 2001 Law on Political Parties Made a
Difference?" Europe-Asia Studies 59(7):1089-113.
Wiseman, Alan E. and John R. Wright. 2008. "The Legislative Median and Partisan Policy." Journal of
Theoretical Politics 20(1):5-29.
Wolbrecht, Christina and David E. Campbell. 2007. "Leading by Example: Female Members of Parliament
As Political Role Models." American Journal of Political Science 51(4):921-39.
Wu, Chung-li and Chi Huang. 2007. "Divided Government in Taiwan's Local Politics: Public Evaluations
of City/County Government Performance." Party Politics 13(6):741-60.
Government Documents
Armenia (Republic). 2007. Hayastani Hanrapetut`Yan Entrakan Orensgirk` P`Op`Okhut`Yunnern u
Lrats`Umnere 2007 T`Vakani Hunvari 27-i Drut`Yamb. Pashtonakan verhratarakut`yun ed. Erevan: HH
Ardaradatut`yan nakhararut`yun.
Codul Electoral Al Republicii Moldova Nr. 1381-XIII Din 21.11.97 : Monitorul Ofical Al R. Moldova, Nr.
81/667 Din 08.12.1997 . 2007. Chisinau: s.n.
Comoros. 2007. Loi Modificative De La Loi Électorale. Moroni: s.n.
Conflictividad Electoral En El Proceso Electoral 2007. 2007. Guatemala: Procurador de los Derechos
Humanos.
Election Commission of Bhutan. 2007. Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) Rules and Regulations of the
Kingdom of Bhutan = 'Brug Gi Tshogs Rgyan Phrul Chas (Ai Wi Aem) Bca' Yig Dan Sgrig b Zi.
Thimphu: Election Commission of Bhutan.
Electoral Commission (Great Britain). 2007. Distribution Between Electoral Regions of UK: MEPs
Recommendation. London: Electoral Commission.
Georgia (Republic). 2007. Sak`Art`Velos Saarc`Evno Kodek`Si Sak`Art`Velos Organuli Kanoni ;
C`Vlilebebit`a Da Damatebebit` 2007 Clis 20 Martamde. T`bilisi: "Bona kauza".
Mexico. 2007. Código Federal De Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales Las Últimas Modificaciones
Para Esta Edición Fueron Publicadas En El D.O. El 24 De Abril De 2006. 1a. ed., actualizada al 1o de
marzo de 2007 ed. México, D.F: Juridiediciones.
Mozambique, Mozambique, and Assembleia da República. 2007. Legislação Eleitoral Leis Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10
e 18/2007. Maputo: Imprensa Nacional de Moçambique.

31
Nepal. 2007. Samvidhanasabha Nirvacana Aina Tatha Niyamavali. Kathamadaum: Madhuvana Praka sana.
Ukraine. 2007. Zakon Ukraïny Pro Vybory Narodnykh Deputativ Ukraïny Za Stanom Na 15 Chervnia 2007
Roku. Kyiv: Parlamentske vyd-vo.
United States, Congress, House, and Committee on House Administration. 2007. Hearing on Verification,
Security, and Paper Records for Our Nation's Electronic Voting Systems Hearing Before the Committee
on House Administration, House of Representatives, One Hundred Ninth Congress, Second Session,
Hearing Held in Washington, DC, September 28, 2006. Washington: U.S. G.P.O. For sale by the Supt. of
Docs., U.S. G.P.O.
United States, Congress, House, Committee on House Administration, and Subcommittee on Elections.
2007. Election Reform Auditing the Vote: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Elections, Committee on
House Administration, House of Representatives, One Hundred Tenth Congress, First Session, Meeting
Held in Washington, DC, March 20, 2007. Washington: U.S. G.P.O. For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S.
G.P.O.
———. 2007. Election Reform Machines and Software: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Elections of
the Committee on House Administration, House of Representatives, One Hundred Tenth Congress, First
Session, Meeting Held in Washington, DC, March 15, 2007. Washington: U.S. G.P.O. For sale by the
Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O.
United States, Congress, House, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Subcommittee on
Information Policy, Census, and National Archives. 2007. Ensuring Fairness and Accuracy in Elections
Involving Electronic Voting Systems Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census,
and National Archives of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of
Representatives, One Hundred Tenth Congress, First Session, April 18, 2007. Washington: U.S. G.P.O.
For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O.
United States, Congress, House, and Committee on the Judiciary. 2007. Protecting the Right to Vote
Election Deception and Irregularities in Recent Federal Elections: Hearing Before the Committee on the
Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Tenth Congress, First Session, March 7, 2007.
Washington: U.S. G.P.O. For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O.
United States, Congress, Senate, and Committee on Armed Services. 2007. Military Voting and the Federal
Voting Assistance Program Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate,
One Hundred Ninth Congress, Second Session, September 28, 2006. Washington: U.S. G.P.O. For sale
by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O.
United States, Congress, Senate, and Committee on the Judiciary. 2008. Prevention of Deceptive Practices
and Voter Intimidation in Federal Elections S. 453 : Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary,
United States Senate, One Hundred Tenth Congress, First Session, June 7, 2007. Washington: U.S.
G.P.O. For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O.
United States, Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, and Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil
Rights, and Property Rights. 2007. Renewing the Temporary Provisions of the Voting Rights Act
Legislative Options After Lulac V. Perry : Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil
Rights, and Property Rights of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Ninth
Congress, Second Session, July 13, 2006. Washington: U.S. G.P.O. For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S.
G.P.O.
Blogs
Election Law Blog: http://electionlawblog.org/
Election Updates: http://electionupdates.caltech.edu/blog.html
Fruits and Votes: http://fruitsandvotes.com/
Political Arithmetik: http://politicalarithmetik.blogspot.com/